Patna High Court

Hotri Devi Alias Hotri KumariversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors

Decided: 13 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: RAJIV ROY

Holding

Since the State affirmed that the land was never acquired, there is no liability for compensation and the writ petition is disposed.

Summary

Petitioner Hotri Devi filed a writ petition seeking an order restraining private respondents (Nos. 6‑12) from receiving any compensation for land she purchased, and directing the Deputy General Manager (No. 5) not to pay any compensation for the construction of State Highway No. 81. The State of Bihar, through a counter‑affidavit, contended that the land had never been acquired, and therefore no compensation was payable to either the petitioner or the private respondents. The Court examined the State’s claim that the land was not acquired and found no basis to entertain the petitioner’s relief. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition, noting that the petitioner could approach the Court again if circumstances changed. The petition was therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the land in question has been acquired by the State for the construction of State Highway No. 81
Whether the private respondents are entitled to compensation for the land sold to the petitioner
Whether the petitioner is entitled to an injunction restraining payment of compensation to the private respondents

Subjects

land acquisition
compensation
highway construction
writ petition
property rights

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8652 of 2018
                 ======================================================
                 Hotri Devi Alias Hotri Kumari Wife of Deo Kumar Tiwary, Resident of
                 Village- Post Office and Police Station- Sandesh, District- Bhojpur at Ara.

                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
           1.    The State Of Bihar
           2.    The Collector, Bhojpur at Ara.
           3.    The District Land Acquisition Officer, Bhojpur at Ara.
           4.    The Circle Officer, Sandesh District Bhojpur at Ara.
           5.    The Deputy General Manager Technical, Central Mechanical Workshop
                 Compound, Sheikhpura, District-
           6.    Manpato Devi, Wife of Late Raj Narayan Singh,
           7.    Baban Singh,
           8.    Ishwar Dhari Singh,
           9.    Arun Singh,
           10. Rabindra Singh,
           11. Birendra Singh, Nos. 7 to 11 sons of Raj Narayan Singh, All residents of
               Village- Purkaul, Police Station- Sandesh, District- Bhojpur at Ara.
           12. Rajdeo Singh, Son of Late Sheopujan Singh, Resident of Village- Pirkaul,
               Police Station- Sandesh, District- Bhojpur at Ara.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :      Mr.Sanjay Kumar Ojha, Advocate
                                               Mr. Ved Prakash Chandan, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :      Mr. Birendra Prasad Singh, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   13-01-2026                    Heard Mr. Ved Prakash Chandan, learned counsel for

                   the petitioner and Mr. Birendra Prasad Singh, learned State

                   counsel.

                                 2. The present petition has been preferred for the
Patna High Court CWJC No.8652 of 2018(6) dt.13-01-2026
                                            2/3




          following relief/s:

                                  (i) for commanding the official respondent-

                                  authorities       to    restrain     the   private

                                  Respondent Nos. 6 to 12 from taking

                                  compensation of the land which they have

                                  sold     to     the    petitioner.   The   private

                                  Respondent Nos. 6 to 12 are continuously

                                  disturbing the poor petitioner to enjoy her

                                  property which was purchased by way of

                                  sale deed 29.11.1979 and sale deed dated

                                  25.5.1981 and appropriate direction may be

                                  given to Respondent No. 5 not to pay even a

                                  single penny to Respondent Nos. 6 to 12 with

                                  regard to compensation amount for the

                                  construction of State Highway No. 81 which

                                  is being constructed by Bihar State Road

                                  Development the Corporation Limited.

                       3. A counter affidavit has come on behalf of the

          respondent nos. 02 to 04, according to which, the land in

          question has never been acquired and as such there is no

          question of the payment either to the petitioner or the

          respondent nos. 06 to 12.
         Patna High Court CWJC No.8652 of 2018(6) dt.13-01-2026
                                                     3/3




                                4. In that background, allowing the petitioner to

                   agitate the matter afresh, if situation so warrant, considering the

                   statement/submission made by the State that the land in question

                   has never been acquired, the writ petition is disposed of.



                                                 (Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…